Leica SL or Hasselblad X1D

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

.... and this interview does tend to confirm Leica's rather germanic philosophy of producing something with good, reliable, quality all-round performance rather than relying on a few headline features to sell a product.

 

There have been many theoretically great cameras that turn out to have an achilles heel that makes them unusable for a fair percentage of the market ....... the stupid button arrangements and menus made the A7 completely useless for me.

 

All it takes is one supremely irritating or poorly conceived design feature  and the camera is consigned to a cupboard. 

 

I'll always prefer a camera that doesn't irritate me and which I enjoy using ..... and am willing to forgo the extra pixels, menu options etc etc to achieve that. 

 

Not being able to turn off long exposure noise reduction (M, S and SL) and bizarrely short limits on shutter speed (for the M and S camera lines) means I use other brands when shooting landscapes. Not being able to adjust the brightness of the SL viewfinder is unique on the world of EVF still cameras. Firmware bugs introduced in an upgrade still not fixed in the M9. I could list a dozen easily.

 

Leica is not immune to daft design and performance decisions either, unfortunately.

 

Gordon

[Jeff S]

 

 

 

Not being able to turn off long exposure noise reduction (M, S and SL) and bizarrely short limits on shutter speed (for the M and S camera lines) means I use other brands when shooting landscapes. Not being able to adjust the brightness of the SL viewfinder is unique on the world of EVF still cameras. Firmware bugs introduced in an upgrade still not fixed in the M9. I could list a dozen easily.

 

Leica is not immune to daft design and performance decisions either, unfortunately.

 

Gordon

 

 

And sometimes build quality....the apparently cheap AF motor in the S lenses wasn't their crowning achievement.  The best design only works with superior execution.  

 

All brands have some sort of issues....up to us to prioritize and choose.

 

Jeff

[Sandokan]

I tried the X1D today in a church with the 45/3.5. AF worked surprisingly well at ISO800 with 1/12 at f3.5 (as a measure of the darkness). I did not put in a card so have no results to show. Ergonomics were good. Something I will rent when it is out and in V1 firmware and compare it to the Fuji. 

[steppenw0lf]

Did you forget the SD card ? Why not take at least a single shot (for us).

The big question - what is the startup time ? Is a restart after "standby" different ?

[LD_50]

All this start-up time talk has me wondering if everyone sees much better battery life shutting their cameras off rather than leaving them in sleep mode.

 

With my Nikons I always left the cameras on. One thing the Nikon D# series did very well was wake up instantly and ready to AF and shoot. I leave my SL on at all times when I'm out shooting. My M-P stays on when I'm walking about for the most part.

 

In other words, for me the start-up time isn't a big deal. Waking from sleep is much more important. It's a lot like a modern PC or mobile phone in that regard.

[Sandokan]

Did you forget the SD card ? Why not take at least a single shot (for us).

The big question - what is the startup time ? Is a restart after "standby" different ?

 

Sorry. I was at a show in town and the SD card in my camera was covered by a case locked in with Arca QRP, so I did not bother to unscrew it all. As for startup times - I did not notice the delay but then again, I was not looking for a delay. Just the ergonomics. 

[Guest VVJ]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In the meanwhile the shipment date has been pushed back...:

http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/ming-thein-explains-hasselblad-x1d-will-ship-later-expected-shares-new-images-meantime/

[scott kirkpatrick]

In the meanwhile the shipment date has been pushed back...:

http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/ming-thein-explains-hasselblad-x1d-will-ship-later-expected-shares-new-images-meantime/

 

I love the spin that is being put on this.  According to Ming Thein, Hasselblad has revised its production arrangements because they are receiving more orders than expected.

 

scott

[IkarusJohn]

Interesting video by Ming Then on his website, featuring the X1D - he uses a lot of marketing language which could have come straight from Leica - "essence" of photography, etc.

 

Undoubtedly, this is an interesting camera, and the longer Hasselblad takes to actually release it, the better in many respects.  Ming also suggests that there are final hardware and software tweaks going on.  The "average" EVF is not very appealing - I'm still wondering about image blackout (frame-rate, as discussed by Stefan Schulz in relation to the SL), as this was a total killer for me with the T.  The SL achieves equivalent or better blackout times than film SLRs.  Longer blackout times for the X1D will not be very appealing.

 

The image quality of that larger sensor is seductive, it has to be said ...

 

Then again, I have zero complaints about the SL.

 

PS - can anyone explain the differences in pixel pitch and size, and why it matters?  The 50c sensor (43.8mm x 32.9mm) is 2/3 bigger in area than the SL sensor (24mm x 36mm), yet is 51.4MP compared to 24MP, which suggests a greater density of pixels with the X1D.  Ming Then and others have pointed out the pitfalls of the higher density sensors on the D800e and the Sony A7r2 and other cameras (the Canon 5Dsr, as well, if I recall correctly).  The X1D seems to be aimed at a similar user market as the SL - handheld, travel, available light etc (despite being a different beast).

 

My quest really relates to usability.  For me, the 24MP sensor on the 35mm M and SL cameras is a sweet spot, where the higher specced sensors on the D800e and A7r were not.  I was incapable of exploiting the benefits of more pixels with those cameras for all the reasons outlined before (shutter slap etc).  Is 50MP a sweet spot for this format? or will the X1d suffer from the same complications as other high MP 35mm cameras?  I have a tripod, but I really don't want to carry it everywhere ...

Edited October 9, 2016 by IkarusJohn

[steppenw0lf]

I had a look at the video of Ming Thein (from vimeo, because from Hasselblad it was not possible - you need to register, for a marketing video !! Clever !)

Maybe I had the wrong expectations, but I hoped it was made with a X1D, but of course it is not (well I am simply too naive).

It means nothing regarding the technical quality of the X1D - I expect the best. I mean I want to stay objective/unbiased, although he is anything but unbiased. But his text is more or less without an equal in the video. (text and video could have been put together by coincident).

 

But short: I did not like the images he showed and thought, what a waste to print them in this monster size. And I found the video unimpressive. His earlier shots (I have seen architectural shots) were clearly better. 

 

This has nothing to do with the quality of the X1D, but ...    

Of course the failure of a single photographer does not mean the camera has technical flaws.

 

Summary: So what ....       (nothing proved, neither good nor bad. Edit: O.K. it "proved" that the images can be printed in monster size.)

 

And yes, I think it is possible that others like this video. And I don't mind.  And I hope vice versa.

 

Edit: And yes, I still think the combo is front heavy. The big one was only a 70mm equivalent lens. And he completely avoided the use of lens hoods - always up to a little mischief.

Edited October 9, 2016 by steppenw0lf

[Peter H]

...............

 

The image quality of that larger sensor is seductive, it has to be said ...

 

Then again, I have zero complaints about the SL.

................

 

 

I read an interview with the Fuji president (I think he was the president) who said that while the aim of their new MF camera was to provide "ultimate" image quality (and that the difference between APS-C and full-frame was too small to justify their creating a FF system and competing with Canon and Nikon) the biggest difference between MF and FF for most users will not be objectively measurable quality or even potential maximum print size, though these are factors,  but what he calls "the look" of the photos.

 

I really do think that we need to see photos from these cameras, quite probably in print, and preferably made by ourselves, before any meaningful conclusions can be drawn.

Edited October 9, 2016 by Peter H

[LD_50]

I read an interview with the Fuji president (I think he was the president) who said that while the aim of their new MF camera was to provide "ultimate" image quality (and that the difference between APS-C and full-frame was too small to justify their creating a FF system and competing with Canon and Nikon) the biggest difference between MF and FF for most users will not be objectively measurable quality or even potential maximum print size, though these are factors,  but what he calls "the look" of the photos.

 

I really do think that we need to see photos from these cameras, quite probably in print, and preferably made by ourselves, before any meaningful conclusions can be drawn.

Photos are available from several cameras with this sensor. Fuji has claimed it's a different sensor but a recent article worded their custom sensor claim as having to do with the microlenses. I expect it's the same Sony sourced sensor as seen in several cameras from Pentax, Hasselblad, and Phase.

[Peter H]

Photos are available from several cameras with this sensor. Fuji has claimed it's a different sensor but a recent article worded their custom sensor claim as having to do with the microlenses. I expect it's the same Sony sourced sensor as seen in several cameras from Pentax, Hasselblad, and Phase.

This is acknowledged to be the case, and the underlying sensor is a very impressive thing.

 

But despite the basic sensor itself being the same, I wouldn't be surprised to see marked differences between them all in a variety of aspects. The Hasselblad and Fuji appear quite different already, and much of the architecture and processing around the sensor will definitely be different. I'm really looking forward to finding out whether they will work for me.

Edited October 10, 2016 by Peter H

[LD_50]

This is acknowledged to be the case, and the basic sensor is a very impressive thing.

But despite the sensor itself being the same, I wouldn't be surprised to see marked differences between them all in a variety of aspects. The Hasselblad and Fuji appear quite different already, even before comparing their output, and I'm really looking forward to finding out whether they will work for me.

I agree it's impressive. I was commenting on your point that we need to see photos and prints before conclusions can be made. I would argue this is already basically possible by using other cameras with the same sensor.

 

It's the lens lineups, the haptics, the overall system, the UI, etc that will make the difference between the Fuji and Hasselblad, not the difference in output.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

 

I really do think that we need to see photos from these cameras, quite probably in print, and preferably made by ourselves, before any meaningful conclusions can be drawn.

 

 

Couldn't agree more. I've done my own tests with the Pentax variant against the Sony A7R2. There's only a 300 pixel horizontal difference between these sensors and I did 24" prints from both.

 

Honestly, there's not a lot of detail differences. And in some situations it would be difficult to pick them apart in a blind test.

 

However there's definitely a difference in tonality and when it's there it's obvious. Maybe in 5-10% of shots. For example anything with deep shadows and/or long exposures clearly shows up as superior tonal transitions in the larger sensor. The Pentax also holds its colour much better at high ISO's.

 

OTOH when I did studio shots where I had total control over exposure and contrast, it was harder to see the differences. I could see a difference but I was really looking for it. I had to print the file for any differences to show up.

 

I also have an S (S2 and type 007) system. The 007 is new to me so I've done some testing in the last few days. Even though the resolution is lower than both the Pentax and the Sony I can see the extra tonality in the S shots over the Sony.

 

I don't see most of this until I hit the print button. I see differences on screen but a print really shows.

 

It's also been mentioned that the rest of the system will make a difference as well and that's what I find really interesting in my tests. I compared three sensational lenses (totally unscientifically and occasionally at different times), The Zeiss 100MP on the Sony A7R2 @f8. The Pentax FA120mm f4 macro @ f11. The Summarit 120mm 2.5. The difference is stark. Regardless of resolution the Leica lens is clearly better than either the Sony or Pentax. The Leica lens is near perfect wide open and stays that way. It's simply a brilliant lens. The Pentax has lower contrast which helps in high DR landscapes. The Zeiss is in between. I was also expecting, based on internet chatter, for the 007 sensor to be a step down from the Pentax. So far I don't see that in the ways I'd use the camera. Is the Pentax better at ISO 6400? No idea. I'll never shoot either option at that ISO.

 

I'll still prefer the Pentax as a landscape camera. I'd love to switch to the 007 but the camera doesn't work in a way I need it to for landscapes. I *need* longer exposures than the Leica allows. I *need* the ability to turn off long exposure noise reduction. I prefer the tilt screen on the Pentax to the fixed one on the Leica. Although the Leica body is smaller it's a bigger system than the Pentax, and heavier. Also the Leica 30-90 zoom isn't as good as a 25 year old Pentax zoom in the extreme corners at infinity. The centre 80% is staggering. But the corners are mush beyond 50mm at longer distances. The Pentax zooms don't resolve as well in the centre but are consistent to the corner at f8.

 

So my favourite camera is the S007. But there's enough that irritates as a system, that for landscape photography that I'll shoot the Pentax. The S007 will not be my only system although I'd love it to be. It's clearly better, for me for studio, portraiture, commercial and weddings. I'd shoot macro on the Leica. What I haven't done and what I need to do is to take the S into the field and see if I can live with its shortcomings. I do think the LENR and short exposure times will frustrate. If Leica could fix the LENR and exposure time settings I would almost certainly give up a bit of resolution and some size/weight to get those lenses into the field. I do think the Pentax has a slightly better sensor. But a sensor does not, a camera system make. Will the X1D lenses really perform as well as Hasselblad say they will?

 

I suppose my point is, that both Fuji and Hasselblad are about to release highly desirable cameras. Pentax and Leica already have fantastic systems available. But until we get to see beyond just the specifications we really won't know how suitable is to each of our applications. I'd like to think that Hasselblad will make a system that will replace my Pentax with less weight and the advantages of mirrorless. (Actually I'd prefer Leica to fix the LENR and long exposures in firmware.) What I don't know is how consistent the lenses are across the frame. How the camera handles long exposure times in a body that will probably struggle with heat dissipation. How long until the lenses I want/need are available. What if the Fuji has shutter shock? As much as I'd like mirrorless, smaller/lighter, I have some things I'm not prepared to give up from what I already have. Specifications and reputation don't give me the information I need. I'm going to have to get my hands on one.

 

Somehow we'll need to make some compromises. It'll just be whichever system has the least compromises for each or our individual needs. Choice is good, at least.

 

Gordon

Edited October 10, 2016 by FlashGordonPhotography

[Guest]

Gordon, thank you for an extremely interesting post. I would be extremely interested to hear your views on a X1D when you have had your hands on one in and out of the studio.

[thighslapper]

I read an interview with the Fuji president (I think he was the president) who said that while the aim of their new MF camera was to provide "ultimate" image quality (and that the difference between APS-C and full-frame was too small to justify their creating a FF system and competing with Canon and Nikon) the biggest difference between MF and FF for most users will not be objectively measurable quality or even potential maximum print size, though these are factors,  but what he calls "the look" of the photos.

 

 

 I have to say........ this is pure marketing b*llocks ..... all the big players are casting around for a bit of an ever shrinking market that they can exploit. MF is just the latest of these as the electronics/processing/manufacture cost is now catching up with the sensor size and it is being pushed as a DSLR 35mm replacement. At this price they should all deliver exceptionally good results, but as has been pointed out ad nauseam, here and elsewhere for example,  the differences at modest print sizes between the Leica T, Leica SL and Leica S is marginal in practice. I don't make my living from photography, so like IkJ. it all comes down to what gives the best balance between ergonomics, flexibility and image quality for whatever usual use you put the camera to. Note I leave out 'value for money' ...... as most on the forum are Leica owners 

Edited October 10, 2016 by thighslapper

[Vieri]

...

 

So my favourite camera is the S007. But there's enough that irritates as a system, that for landscape photography that I'll shoot the Pentax. The S007 will not be my only system although I'd love it to be. It's clearly better, for me for studio, portraiture, commercial and weddings. I'd shoot macro on the Leica. What I haven't done and what I need to do is to take the S into the field and see if I can live with its shortcomings. I do think the LENR and short exposure times will frustrate. If Leica could fix the LENR and exposure time settings I would almost certainly give up a bit of resolution and some size/weight to get those lenses into the field. I do think the Pentax has a slightly better sensor. But a sensor does not, a camera system make. Will the X1D lenses really perform as well as Hasselblad say they will?

 

I suppose my point is, that both Fuji and Hasselblad are about to release highly desirable cameras. Pentax and Leica already have fantastic systems available. But until we get to see beyond just the specifications we really won't know how suitable is to each of our applications. I'd like to think that Hasselblad will make a system that will replace my Pentax with less weight and the advantages of mirrorless. (Actually I'd prefer Leica to fix the LENR and long exposures in firmware.) What I don't know is how consistent the lenses are across the frame. How the camera handles long exposure times in a body that will probably struggle with heat dissipation. How long until the lenses I want/need are available. What if the Fuji has shutter shock? As much as I'd like mirrorless, smaller/lighter, I have some things I'm not prepared to give up from what I already have. Specifications and reputation don't give me the information I need. I'm going to have to get my hands on one.

 

Somehow we'll need to make some compromises. It'll just be whichever system has the least compromises for each or our individual needs. Choice is good, at least.

 

Gordon

 

 

+1. Totally agree, Gordon. The S Typ 007 is a fantastic camera that could be near-perfect for landscapes with just a few tweaks. Contrarily to you, I do use it in the field: however, I also lug around an SL with a S-Adater T, both for backup, to have a wider angle option and - especially - to have a longer exposure option than what the S offers (1 minute is not even close to be long exposure, if you ask me). To me, the app makes the non-tilting screen a non-issue; I haven't tried the 30-90mm yet but will do so soon, at the moment I am using the 24, 35 and 70 and they all are extremely good performers, nothing comparable in the Pentax lineup (the X1D and the Fuji are yet unknown quantities, IQ wise, so we'll have to wait and see).

 

All Leica has to do is tweak the S's Firmware and give us longer exposures (and perhaps the option to turn NR off) to make the S a fantastic landscape camera. I seriously hope they will. Perfect solution would be adding longer shutter speed in M mode, as they did with the SL, but just lengthening B mode to, say, 30 or 60 minutes would do. I'd take just 10 minutes, even

 

Best,

 

Vieri

 

 

 

[Peter H]

 I have to say........ this is pure marketing b*llocks ..... all the big players are casting around for a bit of an ever shrinking market that they can exploit. MF is just the latest of these as the electronics/processing/manufacture cost is now catching up with the sensor size and it is being pushed as a DSLR 35mm replacement. At this price they should all deliver exceptionally good results, but as has been pointed out ad nauseam, here and elsewhere for example,  the differences at modest print sizes between the Leica T, Leica SL and Leica S is marginal in practice. I don't make my living from photography, so like IkJ. it all comes down to what gives the best balance between ergonomics, flexibility and image quality for whatever usual use you put the camera to. Note I leave out 'value for money' ...... as most on the forum are Leica owners 

 

 

 

No, it's not marketing bollocks. There certainly are differences in output according to sensor size, whether you're comparing APS-C with FF, or FF with MF, or anything else. And it certainly isn't just a question of maximum print size.

 

Whether and to what extent those differences matter to you is another question.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[vladik]

What do you think, versatile system platform Leica SL or medium format Hasselblad compactness?

 

 

When the X1S was announced the thaught of getting Leica SL disappeared, but then comes Fujifilm GFX 50S. So this camera is my next purchase to be used mainly for landscape and nature. I am keeping the M 240 for the time being, but not for long to be replaced by Fujifilm XT-2. I might keep couple of M lenses to be used on XT-2 the rest gone go, so it is almost goodbye Leica for me.